Abstract: 1. Livestock depredation by large carnivores is an important conservation and economic concern
and conservation management would benefit from a better understanding of spatial variation
and underlying causes of depredation events. Focusing on the endangered snow leopard
Panthera uncia and the wolf Canis lupus, we identify the ecological factors that predispose
areas within a landscape to livestock depredation. We also examine the potential mismatch
between reality and human perceptions of livestock depredation by these carnivores whose
survival is threatened due to persecution by pastoralists.
2. We assessed the distribution of the snow leopard, wolf and wild ungulate prey through field
surveys in the 4000 km2 Upper Spiti Landscape of trans-Himalayan India. We interviewed local
people in all 25 villages to assess the distribution of livestock and peoples’ perceptions of the risk
to livestock from these carnivores. We monitored village-level livestock mortality over a 2-year
period to assess the actual level of livestock depredation. We quantified several possibly influential
independent variables that together captured variation in topography, carnivore abundance
and abundance and other attributes of livestock. We identified the key variables influencing livestock
depredation using multiple logistic regressions and hierarchical partitioning.
3. Our results revealed notable differences in livestock selectivity and ecological correlates of
livestock depredation – both perceived and actual – by snow leopards and wolves. Stocking
density of large-bodied free-ranging livestock (yaks and horses) best explained people’s threat
perception of livestock depredation by snow leopards, while actual livestock depredation was
explained by the relative abundance of snow leopards and wild prey. In the case of wolves,
peoples’ perception was best explained by abundance of wolves, while actual depredation by
wolves was explained by habitat structure.
4. Synthesis and applications. Our results show that (i) human perceptions can be at odds
with actual patterns of livestock depredation, (ii) increases in wild prey populations will intensify
livestock depredation by snow leopards, and prey recovery programmes must be accompanied
by measures to protect livestock, (iii) compensation or insurance programmes should
target large-bodied livestock in snow leopard habitats and (iv) sustained awareness
programmes are much needed, especially for the wolf.

Abstract: Conflicts between humans and snow leopards are documented across much of their overlapping distribution
in Central Asia. These conflicts manifest themselves primarily in the form of livestock depredation
and the killing of snow leopards by local herders. This source of mortality to snow leopards is a key conservation concern. To investigate human-snow leopard conflicts in the Sanjiangyuan Region of the Tibetan Plateau, we conducted household interviews about local herders’ traditional use of snow leopard
parts, livestock depredation, and overall attitudes towards snow leopards. We found most respondents
(58%) knew that snow leopard parts had been used for traditional customs in the past, but they claimed
not in the past two or three decades. It may be partly due to the issuing of the Protection of Wildlife Law
in 1998 by the People’s Republic of China. Total livestock losses were damaging (US$ 6193 per household
in the past 1 year), however snow leopards were blamed by herders for only a small proportion of those
losses (10%), as compared to wolves (45%) and disease (42%). Correspondingly, the cultural images of
snow leopards were neutral (78%) and positive (9%) on the whole. It seems that human-snow leopard
conflict is not intense in this area. However, snow leopards could be implicated by the retaliatory killing
of wolves. We recommend a multi-pronged conservation program that includes compensation, insurance
programs, and training local veterinarians to reduce livestock losses.

Abstract: We conducted surveys above 3000 m elevation in eight protected areas of Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh. These surveys provide new information on snow leopard in Uttarakhand on the basis of indirect evidence such as pugmark and scat. Snow leopard evidence (n = 13) were found between 3190 and 4115 m elevation. On an average, scats (n = 09) of snow leopard were found for every 56 km walked and pugmarks (n = 04) for every 126 km walked. Altogether, about 39% of the evidence were found on the hill-slope followed by valley floor (30%), cliff (15%) and 8% from both stream bed and scree slope. Genetic analysis of the scats identified three different individuals by using snow leopard specific primers. Snow leopard-human conflicts were assessed through questionnaire based interviews of shepherds from Govind Pashu Vihar Wildlife Sanctuary, Askot Wildlife Sanctuary and Nanda Devi Biosphere Reserve areas of Uttarakhand. Surveys revealed that livestock depredation (mule, goat and sheep) is the only cause of snow leopard-human conflicts and contributed 36% of the diet of snow leopard. Blue sheep and rodents together comprised 36.4% of the total diet. We found that 68.1% of the surveyed area was used for pastoral activities in Uttarakhand and Himachal Pradesh and 12.3% area was under tourism, defence and developmental activities.

Abstract: For carnivore species, spatial avoidance is one of the evolutionary solutions to
coexist in an area, especially if food habits overlap and body sizes tend to coincide.
We reviewed the diets of two large cats of similar sizes, the endangered snow leopard
(Panthera uncia, 16 studies) and the near-threatened common leopard (Panthera par-
dus, 11 studies), in Asia. These cats share ca 10,000 km2 of their mountainous range,
although snow leopards tend to occur at a significantly higher altitude than common
leopards, the former being a cold-adapted species of open habitats, whereas the latter
is an ecologically flexible one, with a preference for woodland. The spectrum of prey
of common leopards was 2.5 times greater than that of snow leopards, with wild prey
being the staple for both species. Livestock rarely contributed much to the diet. When
the breadth of trophic niches was compared, overlap ranged from 0.83 (weight categories)
to one (main food categories). As these leopard species have approximately
the same size and comparable food habits, one can predict that competition will arise
when they live in sympatry. On mountains, climate change has been elevating the
upper forest limit, where both leopard species occur. This means a habitat increase
for common leopards and a substantial habitat reduction for snow leopards, whose
range is going to be squeezed between the forest and the barren rocky altitudes, with
medium- to long-term undesirable effects on the conservation of this endangered cat

Abstract: Executive Summary:
The report is part of a project aiming to strengthen capacities to implement CITES, especially in
Central Asia and to satisfy the CITES‐related requirements of trading partners, to prevent
overexploitation and to ensure legal international trade in wild fauna and flora does not exceed
sustainable levels. The objective is to enhance the policies and regulations concerning trophy
hunting in selected range States of the Argali Ovis ammon: Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, the Russian
Federation, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan and to provide a framework for the establishment of
sustainable hunting programmes that support conservation. This report is focused on the relevance
of trophy hunting for conservation and associated local livelihoods.
Sustainable use of biological diversity is an integral part of the Convention on Biodiversity (1992) and
is seen as a valuable tool in conserving biological diversity. The Addis Ababa Principles and Guidelines
(AAPG) set out the basis for sustainable use of natural resources. The IUCN SSC1 Guiding Principles on
Trophy Hunting as a Tool for Creating Conservation Incentives, and the European Charter on Hunting
and Biodiversity provide further guidance on the sustainability of trophy hunting, including on highly
threatened species. The International Council for Game and Wildlife Conservation (CIC) together
with the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) has also developed Best
Practice Guidelines for trophy hunting.
All five project countries are Parties to CITES, except Tajikistan, which has begun the accession
process. Argali are the focus of the trophy hunting in the region and they represent the most
expensive trophy in the five project countries. Other CITES‐listed hunting species are Brown Bear
Ursus arctos, Wolf Canis lupus, Musk Deer Moschus moschiferus, Eurasian Lynx Lynx lynx (all mainly
in Russia) and Houbara Bustard Chlamydotis undulata. Markhor Capra falconeri and Urial Ovis
orientalis have also been hunted at times but are not the object of regular trophy hunting
programmes at present. Other widely hunted species are not listed in the CITES Appendices.
A recent analysis by TRAFFIC of the CITES trade database showed that 10 245 hunting trophy items
from species listed in the CITES Appendices were exported from the project countries between 2000
and 2010. Almost all trophy items consisted of Argali, Brown Bear and Wolf. Most were exported
from Russia (9473 trophies), with smaller numbers from Tajikistan (705), Kyrgyzstan (668), and
Kazakhstan (126), and 13 from Uzbekistan.
In the region, wildlife is generally the property of the State, which awards rights to use it to
individuals or other entities. National legislation covering hunting and wildlife protection may refer
to sustainable use but this is undefined. The legal rights of local communities are also not generally
specified. FAO and CIC produced a review of national legislation that set out in detail the basic
principles of sustainable wildlife management laws (2008). One of the main findings was that
legislative frameworks in the region frequently consisted of different legal instruments that were not
always harmonized and sometimes overlapped. In some cases, there was also a lack of institutional
clarity, with overlapping jurisdictions among different agencies.
Poaching for meat and trophies or commercial products is a significant factor across the whole
region, negatively affecting all the main hunting species, as well as protected species. Wild
populations have been reduced, sometimes drastically so. Poaching of Argali and other mountain
ungulates may be carried out by military or border personnel and is not restricted to areas outside
formal nature reserves: indeed, law enforcement and protected area staff are sometimes complicit
in illegal hunting, driven in part by the very low salaries. There are numerous recent examples of
poaching and illegal trade in trophies of CITES‐listed species. The actual level of illegal off‐take is
unknown. Known cases may represent a very small fraction of the real total. The wildlife
conservation sector is under‐resourced across the region with a lack of funding, trained personnel,
transport and other equipment severely limiting the effectiveness of anti‐poaching efforts.
Memoranda of Understanding under the Convention on Migratory Species (CMS MoUs) and their
associated action plans for Saiga Saiga tatarica and Bukhara Deer Cervus elaphus bactrianus have
proven to be effective instruments in facilitating species recovery. A CMS Single Species Action Plan
for Argali is in preparation (Roettger & Singh, in prep) and will provide a framework for conservation.
Trophy hunting in the region is predominantly organized on a commercial basis. Community‐based
hunting initiatives in the region are in their infancy and face some legal and institutional obstacles.
There are however promising developments: for example, five community‐based NGOs in Tajikistan
are managing wildlife in legally assigned areas and three of them have hosted hunting clients (on
non‐CITES species). Well‐developed community‐based trophy hunting programmes operate in
Pakistan, targeted at Markhor Capra falconeri which is listed in CITES Appendix I, and in Namibia,
which is widely seen as a leader in such programmes, and while the specific conditions and sociopolitical
background of both differ in several ways from those in the region, they nonetheless
provide instructive guidance on the principles of successful community conservancy organization.
There is an extensive literature on trophy hunting, its potential to contribute to conservation of
biodiversity and local livelihoods, and the potential negative effects of selective harvesting on
species. The consensus view seems to be that selective harvest of trophy‐age males does not impact
negatively in the short term, if only a low proportion of the available trophy‐age individuals are
harvested, but uncontrolled harvest can lead to a decline in horn size and thus trophy quality, as well
as have negative demographic effects. Trophy hunting programmes raise substantial revenues in
some African countries, and in the best cases significant sums are received at community or
conservancy level. However, this is not universally the case and inequitable benefit sharing remains
a major challenge to be overcome. Good governance is an essential requirement when developing
hunting and other forms of community based management initiative.
A possible decline in size of Argali trophies in Kyrgyzstan has been reported and determining
whether this is actually the case, and the causes, is a priority. Standardized monitoring, involvement
of independent experts, transparency in quota setting and allocation of licences are all seen as
prerequisites of well‐managed and sustainable hunting operations. Allocation of long‐term leases for
concessions is needed to motivate managers to invest in anti‐poaching and other conservation
measures and remove the temptation for short‐term profit that threatens the sustainability of the
resource.
Developing all forms of Community‐based Natural Resource Management (CBNRM) – trophy hunting
and tourism – is also recommended. As the concept is still new to many parts of the region, and the
legal‐political background is not always sympathetic, building on examples of existing community
conservancies (in Tajikistan) or where there is an administrative basis for local management of
resources (Kyrgyzstan), is likely to be effective. Ensuring that communities and conservancies are
legally empowered to manage and utilise wildlife and to receive revenues for such use is a basic
requirement.
Recommendations on good practice are set out in several publications and salient points relevant to the region are highlighted.